write_drum_grid

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description reinforces the destructiveHint annotation by stating 'REPLACES existing notes' and details velocity mapping and instrument names. However, it does not mention potential side effects like clip creation or automation behavior, which would enhance transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with clear sections, an example, and front-loaded purpose. Every sentence adds value, and the use of line breaks improves readability.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the custom ASCII grid format, the description is complete with instrument list, velocity mapping, and example. The output schema exists, so return values are not needed. No major gaps remain.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates by thoroughly explaining the 'grid' parameter with format, instruments, and example. The 'swing' parameter is mentioned but not detailed; 'track_index' and 'clip_index' are not described, leaving some burden on common knowledge.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description explicitly states the tool writes drums from an ASCII grid and replaces existing notes, providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like generate_drum_pattern by emphasizing direct writing and replacement.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description clarifies that the tool replaces existing notes, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare it to alternatives like add_notes_to_clip or edit_notes for non-destructive edits. The grid format and instrument list are well explained.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.